Beinart’s Blog Perches On the Left

Zion Square, Peter Beinart’s group blog on Israel and the region at The Daily Beast, launched this morning. Beinart has written a defense, “Why Zion Square?” Newsweek has published a long excerpt from Beinart’s forthcoming The Crisis of Zionism, adapted with a lead based on last week’s AIPAC Conference, chronicling President Obama’s initial stance of pressuring Israel on settlements (which Beinart praises) before backing down. As I reported Friday, Zion Square endeavors to welcome a wide range of opinions whose center is nonetheless, by Beinart’s own admission, to the left of the center of mainstream American Jewish discourse.

In light of an email I received Friday afternoon from the Palestine Center’s Yousef Munayyer, one of Zion Square’s regular columnists, it’s worth taking stock of the ambition and, some would say, audacity of Beinart’s project. Arguing that my post “suggests I am a supporter of a ‘Jewish democratic state,’ ” Munayyer explained, “This is a gross mischaracterization of my views.” He added: “You may state that I am a ‘firm supporter of the Palestinian right to return, an end to the Israeli occupation, and equal rights for all people living throughout the land regardless to religion, nationality, or ethnic background.’” He requested a correction; I clarified the post, which had reported that Beinart believed “most of Zion Square’s contributors” are for a Jewish, democratic state. In recent writings, Munayyer has expressed support for boycott, divestment, and sanctions and the Gaza flotilla. For several years, he has advocated Palestinian unification while not insisting on Hamas recognizing Israel’s right to exist.

Zion Square’s purpose statement insists, “We believe in a two state solution in accordance with the liberal Zionist principles articulated in Israel’s declaration of independence. … But we also believe in respectful argument with those who disagree; we aim not to draw red lines but to debate them.”

This morning, Munayyer added, “If I was in Peter’s position, I probably wouldn’t have set it up precisely this way, but I don’t think that that means the opportunity to put a Palestinian perspective in a mainstream perspective should be missed.” He continued, “There is an over-saturation of Zionist perspectives in the American debate on Israel/Palestine. I hope my column at the blog on Israel/Palestine at The Daily Beast, a site with three million or so unique viewers per month, is a step toward opening the broader discussion to anti-Zionist voices.” He added, “I believe it is in the interests of American audiences to read Palestinians.”

In “Why Zion Square?” Beinart declares, “We plan to put front and center the very questions that official Jewish discourse rules out of order. That means challenging liberal Zionism from the left and the right. It means hosting biweekly columns by the hawkish Israeli historian Benny Morris and by the anti-Zionist Palestinian-American writer Yousef Munayyer.”

In an email to Tablet Magazine, Beinart stood by his selection of Munayyer. “I also said I wanted my own position to be challenged,” he argued. “[Benny] Morris, [Einat] Wilf, and perhaps [Yehudah] Mirsky will challenge it from the right. I think Yousef, as a smart and honest believer in a secular binational state, will challenge it from the left. That’s part of why I asked him.”

Beinart insisted that his roster of columnists is true to that statement, while acknowledging that they are “to the left of the Jewish organizational center of gravity” (“and certainly to the right of the Palestinian center of gravity—as evidenced by the fact that my Twitter feed is registering about equal flack from neocons and BDS types”).

It seems to me that Morris does not occupy a position on the right side of the spectrum equivalent to Munayyer’s on the left. Rather, judging from the range those two book-end, Zion Square is seeking to situate itself to the left of the mean. Observers who have watched Beinart move in that direction over the past several years should expect to find him, in more ways than one, squarely in the center of his new blog.

“To say I disagree with [Morris] on a great many issues would be an understatement,” said columnist Hussein Ibish in an email this morning. “If Mr. Munayyer now openly says he is an opponent of the two-state solution, that’s an interesting development.” (Munayyer insists he is not an opponent, though he thinks a “just and equitable” one is unlikely.) “But it’s not important because I don’t have to agree with other people writing for this blog and it wouldn’t be a very interesting website if everyone did agree.” He added, “The two-state solution needs to be defended against policies on all sides that are undermining it, particularly Israeli settlement activity, not against fantasies like a greater Israel, the ‘Jordanian option,’ a South Africa-like ‘one-state’ arrangement or anything else that has no chance of either been realized or working in practice.”

WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.

I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at letters@tabletmag.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.

We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.

Calling Benny Morris right-wing shows just how deep into the far left Peter Beinart has drifted. But then again, based on his infamous interview with The Atlantic’s Jeff Goldberg, intellectual honesty and a good understanding of Israel and the I-P conflict are not exactly Beinart’s strong points.

As the ever astute Lee Smith pointed out in Tablet a while back, hosting what promises to be a mostly rabid anti-Israel (or worse) blog is a sure way for the Daily Beast to increase its share of revenue generating clicks…. and for Beinart to boost his career and his already overinflated ego.

Well, when the ruling right-wing Likud party, led by arch-hawk Benjamin Netanyahu, accepts the idea of a Palestinian state and merely quibbles over still keeping a few percent of the West Bank, while Hamas (not to mention Islamic Jihad) rises to the forefront of Palestinian politics on a platform of eliminating Israel and slaughtering Jews, it’s not surprising that diehard occupants of the “middle ground” are going to end up espousing an at least somewhat anti-Zionist position.

The problem for “liberal Zionists” these days is that the moderation of the current mainstream Israeli right is forcing them to choose between their liberalism and their Zionism. If their first priority is Zionism–like, say, Benny Morris–then they’ll tone down their hostility to the current Israeli government rather than abandon their support for Israeli survival. But if, like Beinart, their first priority is their liberalism, then they’ll happily make common cause with anti-Zionists to avoid sounding too much like a Likudnik.

The remaining holdouts–people like Jeffrey Goldberg, and perhaps Marc Tracy–increasingly sound incoherent and anachronistic in their insistence that they are equidistant from both the Israeli right and the anti-Zionist left, and yet still Zionist. That may have been possible during the 1980s, perhaps, but not anymore.

Bill Pearlmansays:

March 12, 2012 - 12:42 pm

Peter Beinart might want to move to Israel and make a run for the Knesset. Obviously in his mind the people of Israel are idiots who don’t really know what’s going on. They need him

Roysays:

March 12, 2012 - 2:06 pm

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every Peter under Heaven.

A time to kiss up to Martin Peretz, a time to ditch Martin Peretz.

A time to write a book advocating war, a time to write a book advocating peace.

A time to posture as an ardent Zionist, a time to posture as an ambivalent Zionist.

A time to cultivate contacts among establishment names, a time to cultivate contacts among self-styled anti establishment names.

A time for sweaters, a time for suits and jackets.

For Zlotasays:

March 12, 2012 - 4:23 pm

So is it a political eqivalent of cutting?

Name (required)Email (required, will not be published)Website (optional)

Message

2000

Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.